322 



ELECTION LAWS. 



must be left untrammeled by any provisions, or 

 even rules of evidence, that may injuriously or 

 necessarily impair it, and so the citizen can not 

 forfeit the right except by his own neglect, or 

 by such peculiar accidents as are not attributa- 

 ble to the law itself." The Court then pro- 

 ceeded to examine the act in question. This 

 provides that the registers shall meet on the 

 third Thursday preceding every general elec- 

 tion, and continue in session for the purpose of 

 registering voters from 8 A. M. to 9 p. M., for six 

 successive days. They are required to meet 

 again on the Wednesday preceding the election 

 for the purpose of revising and correcting the 

 lists of voters. The act then declares that no 

 vote shall be received on election-day unless 

 the name of the person offering to vote has 

 been duly registered on one of the designated 

 registration-days. After citing these provis- 

 ions, the Supreme Court said : 



It will be seen by the above that there are but 

 seven days in the year when voters can register. 

 These are the six days beginning on the 3d Thursday 

 preceding the election, and the Wednesday preceding 

 the election. There is no provision for registering at 

 pleasure during the earlier part of the year, and no 

 provision for proving his qualifications on election- 

 day and voting. A voter who is the oldest inhab- 

 itant of the ward, and an elector in it for the greater 

 part of his lifetime, if from absence, however neces- 

 sary or unintentional, during the seven days, can not 

 vote if his name is not on the registry. Many absen- 

 tees may get home to vote, and if they were afforded 

 opportunities during the year, might also register, 

 whose right of suffrage must necessarily be lost under 

 the act. How many mechanics may be absent pursu- 

 ing their trades during the seven days ! A large num- 

 ber of persons will be away on steamboat and other 

 sailing-craft, and elsewhere, earning a support. A 

 large number of students ; a great many of the class 

 usually termed commercial travelers, will be away, 

 perhaps planning their trips to be home on election- 

 day. A large number of citizens in government em- 

 ploy, at Washington and elsewhere, will be at their 

 posts of duty, and may return to vote, but would 

 hardly have the opportunity to return on a different 

 day to register. Even the members of this court 

 might be unable to register without a decided detri- 

 ment to the public business, and might be compelled 

 to elect between the neglect of important official du- 

 ties and the loss of suffrage. Is it a proper regulation 

 of the constitutional right and privilege to say that 

 the right shall be lost unless the elector appears in 

 person during these seven days to register ? Is it rea- 

 sonable to say that all these persons can not register 

 either before or after the seven days ; that they can 

 not make application for registration in writing, upon 

 oath, however well known, but must appear at these 

 arbitrary times in person or lose their rights ? As to 

 this large class of persons necessarily absent during 

 the time allotted for registration by the act, is this 

 reasonable regulation, or is it an abridgment and im- 

 pairment of the right to vote under the guise of regu- 



The Court then reviewed the decisions in 

 other States in which registration laws have 

 been held constitutional, and said : " We have 

 been unable to find any case where a registra- 

 tion act has been upheld as constitutional 

 which contained provisions similar to our stat- 

 ute. The necessary absence of a voter on the 

 seven days provided in the statute for registra- 

 tion, either by sickness, imprisonment, or other 



lawful reason, absolutely forfeits for the time 

 being his constitutional right of suffrage. He 

 can not anticipate expected absence, and regis- 

 ter at an earlier period. He can not prove his 

 right by his affidavit or the affidavits of others, 

 and excuse his personal presence at the place 

 of registration. He can not, on the day of 

 election, or within five days prior thereto, by 

 any proof of constitutional qualification, sup- 

 ply the want of former registration. A for- 

 eigner who Las taken out his first papers and 

 made his necessary declaration to become a 

 citizen, and whose right to full citizenship and 

 the elective franchise will ripen during the 

 five days before, or on the day of election, can 

 not secure registration or the right to vote, be- 

 cause he can not prove in advance that the 

 action of the court will naturalize him. ... A 

 registration law must be reasonable, uniform, 

 impartial, and calculated to facilitate and secure 

 rather than to subvert or impede the exercise 

 of the right to vote. Believing the act in. 

 question unnecessarily, unreasonably, and in- 

 juriously to impair and impede the right of 

 suffrage to the voter who is necessarily absent 

 at the times fixed by the act for registration, 

 we are unanimously of opinion that we are 

 compelled to declare it to be subversive of con- 

 stitutional rights, and therefore void." 



It had been argued that, even if the act 

 should be held unconstitutional and void as to 

 voters necessarily absent, it might be sustained 

 generally and as to all other classes of voters. 

 The Court refused to adopt this view, and held 

 that the entire law was void. 



In 1868 the registry law of Pennsylvania 

 was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme 

 Court of that State. (Page rs. Allen, 58 Penn- 

 sylvania State Reports, 338.) The law was 

 complex, imposed many burdensome restric- 

 tions on the right to vote, and was open to se- 

 rious objections. Three judges concurred in 

 the opinion of the Court, and two dissented. 



The registration law of Wisconsin was de- 

 clared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court 

 of that State in 1880. The opinion is reported 

 in 49 Wisconsin Reports, 555. Four of the 

 five judges concurred ; one dissented. The Con- 

 stitution contained no clause relating to regis- 

 tration. The law required previous registra- 

 tion as a condition of voting, except in the case 

 of persons who became qualified voters after 

 the last registration-day and before the elec- 

 tion. The Court said : " The elector possessing 

 the qualifications prescribed by the Constitu- 

 tion is invested with the constitutional right 

 to vote at any election in this State. These 

 qualifications are explicit, exclusive, and un- 

 qualified by any exceptions, provisos, or con- 

 ditions; and the Constitution, either directly 

 or by implication, confers no authority upon 

 the Legislature to change, impair, add to, or 

 abridge them in any respect. ... By the effect 

 of this law the elector may, and in many cases 

 must and will, lose his vote by being utterly 

 unable to comply with the law by reason of 



